What about Benghazi?

[dylans]

'Hurrah for the Libyan revolution!' ?

I think Dylans might be having a western intervention-inspired wobble

Slap yourself very very hard at the very suggestion.

No wobbles here. However, the thread was inspired after discussing the question with people who surprised me by their support for Western intervention on the basis of not wanting to see a Gaddafi victory in Benghazi. This made me think that those of us who opposed the war owed it to them to directly consider the question of "humanitarian" intervention." if we are to win the argument against the war.

In answer to the question what this thread would be if there was no intervention. I was going to do one on revolutionary kittens.

 

[invisibleplanet]

well they arent arabs for starters.

Saudis and Egyptians would be the top choice , especially egyptians . They invaded Libya under Mubaraks command , again at western urging . Egyptian boots paid for by Saudi money and with Saudi air support would be one likely option .

Might Niger become involved? Or is that too contentious a suggestion?

 

[dylanredefined]

Might Nigeria become involved? Or is that too contentious a suggestion?

I don't think Nigeria has any ability to project force.Other than as UN peace keepers.In a desert you need a very good logistics ability or otherwise your soldiers just die.

 

[dylans]

Might Niger become involved? Or is that too contentious a suggestion?

It's an absolutely fucking lunatic suggestion. Given how the rebels feel about so called "African mercenaries" how do you think Nigerian troops would be treated?

 

[invisibleplanet]

Doh. I meant Niger. Sorry. I've changed my post.

 

[dylans]

Doh. I meant Niger. Sorry. I've changed my post.

oh yeah. kind of spoils my post now

 

[invisibleplanet]

oh yeah. kind of spoils my post now

I'm just working my way through the countries who've had ongoing territorial disputes with Libya ...

 

[invisibleplanet]

... which looks like every country bordering Libya, tbh

 

[Spion]

Slap yourself very very hard at the very suggestion.

 

[Casually Red]

It's an absolutely fucking lunatic suggestion. Given how the rebels feel about so called "African mercenaries" how do you think Nigerian troops would be treated?

basically black faces seem to be a bad idea, which is lovely really saying the place is in Africa . Remember though the mercenaries were just another myth .

 

[elbows]

basically black faces seem to be a bad idea, which is lovely really saying the place is in Africa . Remember though the mercenaries were just another myth .

I was 'lucky' enough to have lots of time to watch Libya when the mercenary talk and emerging signs of the horrible consequences of these beliefs first started to become apparent to us via the internet, likely about a month ago now. It wasnt good. We heard the stories, saw some pics & videos, heard some bad stuff coming from immigrant workers who were trapped or who had fled. We discussed the mercenary myth. What we dont have a sense of, as far as I know, is the actual scale of this stuff, save for some idea of the scale of the human displacement it created. Likewise we dont actually know that Gaddafi hasnt used mercenaries at all. I hope I can make this point without seeming to overstate it, for I did spend time drawing attention to the weaknesses in the evidence that there were mercenaries, and both historic and present images and stories which suggest that the Libyan army had both black Libyans and people who may have been brought in from overseas well before this uprising began.

Anyway it seems to me that likely horrors from both sides are quite bad enough, is there a need to pretend we have such solid evidence for or against any of these things, is there a need to hype them up and talk about them in absolute terms? I'd quite like to discuss concerns without seeing them quickly turned into facts of the variety that are used to beat people over the head with to prove that you have picked the right side.

So, a new concern regarding the conduct of rebels in Benghazi in recent days. When the violence flared up there, tales went round that there were hidden Gaddafi sleeper cells in the city, that had been activated. There were followup stories that more and more of these people were being discovered and caught. I rather hope the story is fiction in its entirely, rather than only in part, for if there were actual witchhunts I wonder quite what their methods were for working out that they had captured an enemy.

On a related note, its possible we will never get accurate numbers for how many people have met their deaths, nor at whose hand. So if the things reach a conclusion at some point, I shall be very interested to hear about number of prisoners that each side has taken, since they will give at least a hint of the brutality that each side has indulged in.

 

[dylans]

Anyway it seems to me that likely horrors from both sides are quite bad enough, is there a need to pretend we have such solid evidence for or against any of these things, is there a need to hype them up and talk about them in absolute terms? I'd quite like to discuss concerns without seeing them quickly turned into facts of the variety that are used to beat people over the head with to prove that you have picked the right side.

Absolutely right. There are other issues around racism that are worth discussing in themselves, quite apart from the mercenary/no mercenary argument too. Such as the question of the regional events as a whole being expressed in pan Arabic or Arab nationalist terms. Terms which while on the one level are progressive and secular expressions of national and ethnic self determination also have a dark side.

One such dark side is evidence (and not only in Libya but in Egypt and perhaps in other Arab countries too) of an almost pathological desire to deny the African-ness of North African Arabs in order to express an Arab identity. Something that can be progressive when Arabness is contrasted to sectarian identities or when expressed against ethnic and sectarian division (such as Muslim/ Copt or Sunni Shia or in Libya's case, tribal or regional identities) but also can be expressed in negative terms as evidenced by racism in Libya or Egypt and misogynistic attitudes (Idealised Arab womanhood as opposed to negative views of Western women for example)

It is an topic that I have something to say on and is well worthy of discussion but as elbows said above, discussion of these issues are impossible if they are always consumed into a good guy bad guy narrative. Anyway perhaps a subject for another thread

 

[Casually Red]

As Ive pointed out on another thread , Ghadaffi rejected pan arabism in favour of pan africanism . He funded the ANC and to a large extent the African Union too .He's dispensed some serious largesse to impoverished parts of sub saharan africa and projected himself as an African leader and benefactor . Although its simplistic its only natural that opponents of a reactionary bent would identify black africans with Ghadaffism , and seek to expunge them from the national fabric . Their adoption of a monarchist flag that many Libyans would regard as a symbol of shame points to some serious reactionary undercurrents with these people .

So too the notion of Ghadaffis sleeper cells . I saw one claim today , although I cant stand over it, that rebels in Benghazi had demanded people display their flag from their houses . Those who refused were allegedly being killed . It stands to reason too that Ghadaffi would still have a fair degree of support in those towns . Rebels have been complaining teenagers have been shooting at them from rooftops for weeks now . Ghadaffi himself addressed some very young volunteers preparing to take their own towns back from rbel control . I dont believe they were either mercenaries or sleeper cells , simply very pissed off Libyans who no matter what gripes they might have had with Ghadaffi they wanted no truck with what they see as traiors to Libya and western puppets.

 

[dylans]

Their adoption of a monarchist flag that many Libyans would regard as a symbol of shame points to some serious reactionary undercurrents with these people

No it doesn't. It points to the regionalist and tribalist character of the revolt. Idris shares religious and tribal affinity with many in the East. There is no evidence that the rebels favour a return to monarchy. You are only seeing what you want to see and in doing so you end up sharing the same simplistic narrative as those who see the rebels as all things good. You see an oppressed people rising up against a hated dictator and you see only reactionaries. But in doing so you forget that the Gaddafi regime is a reactionary tribal regime too

 

[IC3D]

No it doesn't. It points to the regionalist and tribalist character of the revolt. Idris shares religious and tribal affinity with many in the East. There is no evidence that the rebels favour a return to monarchy. You are only seeing what you want to see and in doing so you end up sharing the same simplistic narrative as those who see the rebels as all things good. You see an oppressed people rising up against a hated dictator and you see only reactionaries. But in doing so you forget that the Gaddafi regime is a reactionary tribal regime too

His whole pan African thing is odd because I think an arab Margreb unity more obvious I can't help thinking he's the lesser of two bad things the rebels are looking pretty racially sectarian to me.

 

[dylans]

His whole pan African thing is odd because I think an arab Margreb unity more obvious I can't help thinking he's the lesser of two bad things the rebels are looking pretty racially sectarian to me.

Easy for you to say. You are not at risk of being dragged off to a torture chamber for writing a novel

 

[elbows]

His whole pan African thing is odd because I think an arab Margreb unity more obvious

I think I read that this is down to the fact he wanted to lead some great arab things many moons ago, but was rebuffed, and so turned his attention and ego toward Africa.

 

[IC3D]

Easy for you to say. You are not at risk of being dragged off to a torture chamber for writing a novel

Or being murdered for being black or foreign as seems to be going on. Also they armed themselves damn quick compared to Tunisia or Egypt and don't get me wrong because this is an Anarchist rebellion at heart but there seems to be nationalism at play and Gaddafi was a Pan nationalist.

 

[dylans]

I think I read that this is down to the fact he wanted to lead some great arab things many moons ago, but was rebuffed, and so turned his attention and ego toward Africa.

His great Arab anti imperialism led him to deport thousands of Palestinians and strand them in the desert in 1995 in protest at the Oslo accords. I also found this from last month

Concerns come in response to charges made by Libyan leader to the effect that Arabs living in Libya were involved in fighting against gov't. Talkbacks (4) Palestinians on Thursday expressed fear that Muammar Gaddafi would turn against thousands of Palestinians living in Libya under the pretext they are helping his opponents.

The concern came in response to charges made by Gaddafi and his son Seif al-Islam to the effect that Arabs living in Libya were involved in the fighting against the government.

Both the Palestinian Authority and the Hamas government have called on neighboring Arab countries to intervene to prevent Gaddafi from carrying out “massacres” against Palestinians in Libya.

So much for Gaddafi's anti imperialism.

His pan Africanism has never stopped him importing 2 million migrant workers to work for slave wages in the desert with no rights or legal protection either and neither is Gaddafi averse to playing the racist card himself..

In the year 2000 The UN and the international confederation of Trade Unions both condemned the Regime for pandering to racism by playing on stories of Africans being drug dealers and pimps and criminals. Such stoking of racism led to a wave of racist pogroms against African workers in which 135 people were murdered. The regime then used these attacks to deport thousands more African workers. Here is an example of Gaddafis treatment of migrant workers

In the last two years hundreds of migrants and asylum seekers intercepted at sea have been driven back to Libya without any chance of setting foot on European soil to claim asylum. But in Libya, migrants and refugee are victims of discriminatory treatment of all kinds. They live in constant fear of being arrested, in which case they will be indefinitely confined in overcrowded detention centres where they are exploited, beaten, raped, and abused. Refugees who have no possibility of applying for asylum or accessing any other effective remedy, thereby run the risk of being forcibly returned to countries of origin where they may face persecution or torture. The inadequacy of Libya’s response to the flow of migrants and refugees is so infamous and well documented that it simply cannot be the case that the EU member states are only now starting to gain an insight into Libya’s doubtful track record in human rights, rule of law, and democracy.

So much for his pan Africanism.

http://www.opendemocracy.net/gregor-noll-mariagiulia-giuffré/eu-migration-control-made-by-gaddafi

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinio...rstand-gaddafi-better-than-we-do-2239799.html

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2679649/posts

 

[dylans]

Or being murdered for being black or foreign as seems to be going on. Also they armed themselves damn quick compared to Tunisia or Egypt and don't get me wrong because this is an Anarchist rebellion at heart but there seems to be nationalism at play and Gaddafi was a Pan nationalist.

Read my post above about Gaddafi's treatment of migrant workers.

 

[free spirit]

So back to Benghazi. What about Benghazi? I think the final answer to this question is to turn it on its head. What happens when the rebels reach Tripoli, install another tribal dictatorship in Gaddafi's place and exact a revenge on its population. Instead of "what about benghazi. Will we be crying "What about Tripoli?"

I'm sure this has been covered already, but the major difference I see between my thinking and yours is that you seem to think the installation of another dictatorship, and revenge killings across Tripoli are inevitable.

Personally I don't see this as an inevitability, and see significant evidence that this rebellion is far more libyan in nature, and far less tribal than you give credit for. While there do seem to have been some incidents of revenge killings against suspected mercenaries (some of whom may well have been entirely innocent), I've also seen footage of incidents where rebels have been protecting prisoners from others seeking to take revenge, which I take to indicate that there are wiser heads who have the potential to prevent the worst case scenario you present as inevitable from taking place, or at least minimise it.

the fact there's not been a major uprising in Tripoli is IMO at least as likely to have been caused by Tripoli being more heavily garrisoned, with any sign of dissent mercilessly put down before it's even had chance to build than in Benghazi, as it is to indicate that there's no support for the rebellion in Tripoli. In Benghazi they knew they had one garrison to take and burn down after the regime started killing the demonstrators, in Tripoli the place is home to the parts of the army most loyal to the regime, and a far more formidable obstacle for any unarmed protesters seeing their mates killed / arrested to consider attacking further.


sorry if this has already been covered.

 

[IC3D]

Read my post above about Gaddafi's treatment of migrant workers.

Just did, Thanks I think for the informative post, racism is exploited by all sides in Libya it seems and RE the migrants getting abused Europe is involved in their detention in Libya.

 

[dylans]

'm sure this has been covered already, but the major difference I see between my thinking and yours is that you seem to think the installation of another dictatorship, and revenge killings across Tripoli are inevitable.

I don't know what kind of situation will emerge when the regime is replaced but I think the use of Western military power to shepherd the rebels to power makes the installation of another dictatorship fairly inevitable yeah. I certainly don't think that was an inevitable result when the uprising started. As I said I think there were possibilities to make the uprising genuinely national democratic and inclusive. Sadly I think Western intervention has killed any hope of that now.

As for revenge attacks on Tripoli. I don't know. I hope I am wrong. I think there will probably be an insurgency as in Iraq and then a bleeding wound which the West will simply walk away from.

 

[free spirit]

Sadly I think Western intervention has killed any hope of that now.

the only hope of that at the point of western intervention was that the army and airforce advancing on benghazi would have suddenly been so revolted at the thought of what they were doing to their own citizens that they swapped sides, and took the entire army and airforce with them - unless the rebels actually could defeat them in street by street fighting. I see little evidence to convince me that the first option was likely to happen, not once the initial phase was over and Gaddafi seemed to be winning again, and option b would have only led to the army pulling back and shelling a city of a million people from it's perimiter - bad echos of Sarajevo IMO.

so in a few days time, either there would have been no functioning rebellion left, or they'd be just clinging on while the city was bombed to fuck from air and land. That's the situation i see, and why I support military intervention to prevent this happening.

As for revenge attacks on Tripoli. I don't know. I hope I am wrong. I think there will probably be an insurgency as in Iraq and then a bleeding wound which the West will simply walk away from.

you may be right, you may be wrong, but without intervention I could only see the virtual certainty that the rebels would be hunted down and killed, or tortured and killed, benghazi itself would be virtually destroyed, and it's surviving citizens would have to endure brutal police state conditions. I see this as being far more inevitable a consequence of inaction than the potential future problems you fear happening now.

 

[dylans]

In the OP I finished by asking the following.

What happens when the rebels reach Tripoli, install another tribal dictatorship in Gaddafi's place and exact a revenge on its population. Instead of "what about benghazi. Will we be crying "What about Tripoli?"

Well this could well be amended at the moment to "What about Sirte." Sirte is now under siege with coalition air strikes pounding it and rebels encircling the town. As was predicted the town is resisting and so the UN mandate is now turned on it's head. Instead of a rebel town under attack by regime forces, we have a loyalist town under attack by Western forces and rebels. If anyone is under any illusions that the rebels would be welcomed in towns such as Sirte (or Tripoli) they should listen to the voices of the people in Sirte

"I saw death with my own eyes," said Fawzi Imish, whose house and every other in his seafront street had its windows shattered by a Tomahawk missile strike in the early hours of the morning. "It was just intended to terrify people. And if the rebels come here, we will receive them with bullets."

Residents of Sirte's beachfront area protested angrily at an attack on Saturday night which killed three men picnicking on a breakwater surrounding a small harbour, packed with wooden fishing boats abandoned by their Egyptian and Tunisian crews when the uprising began last month. Fragments of the bomb were embedded in a shallow crater at the end of the stone jetty – which had no conceivable military use.

On Khartoum Street, where one of the dead men lived, a woman could be heard wailing inconsolably as grim-faced relatives arrived to pay their respects.

"We are just civilians, there is nothing military here, only fishing boats and ordinary people," complained Ahmed al-Hashr, whose nephew Faraj died in the same attack.

"Inshallah [God willing] we will defend our city, our homes and our coast," shouted an emotional Abdel-Adim al-Karam, a sound engineer whose small children were terrified by the bombing

Our grandfathers fought Mussolini and we will fight and live free in our land," he said. "If Nato really cared about civilians it and the UN would send a mission here to find out who is really the aggressor."

Hatred for the Benghazi rebels has been fuelled by an incident on Sunday when pro-Gaddafi loyalists taking part in a peace march were confronted near Bin Jawad and three of them reportedly shot and killed, despite carrying white flags and olive branches

Now let me remind those who support Western intervention that the call came up because a civilian city was about to be overrun by regime forces. Well right now a civilian town is about to be overrun by rebel forces. Where is the cry "What about Sirte?"